Posts from September 2008

September 28, 2008

I recently saw the Broadway version of Jason Robert Brown's new musical 13, which is currently in previews at the Jacobs Theater (formerly the Royale). When I saw the show at the Goodspeed, I found it promising but a tad earnest. (Read my review.) The creators have since made significant changes to the show, some of them very effective, others not so much.

One thing that is completely different is the set, designed here by David Farley (Sunday in the Park With George). At the Goodspeed, the show had more of a unit set representing a high school gym, with set pieces that rolled on and off. The Broadway set is far more literal and flashy, but I can't really say that it's more effective. Perhaps the producers thought that they needed to give Broadway audiences more visuals to justify the $111.50 top ticket price.

Composer/lyricist Jason Robert Brown seems to have made considerable changes in the score, which are for the most part effective. Act one seems more streamlined, getting to the core action of the show more efficiently. The book by Dan Elish and Robert Horn
contains much that is really true-to-life, and some very funny one-liners, a few of which were a bit too
sophisticated to be coming from the mouths of babes. There are also
some really edgy/questionable jokes that might not go over too well
with some of the PC New Yorker crowds.

I saw the show early in previews, and at that point it seemed that director Jeremy Sams had quite a few spots in the show that needed focus and tightening, in particular the opening number and the opening of Act 2. The last number in Act 1, "Here I Come," also needed attention. It takes place in the lobby of the cineplex where the characters in the show have just seen a slasher horror film, and the character Evan is surrounded by all these video-game machines (which doubtless made a dent in the show's production budget). Well, of course, the games figure into the business of the number, but it's not really organic. Then the cast launches into this (presumably fantasy) "You Got Served" dance sequence, in which the Evan character challenges his adversaries to this inscrutable dance off. It really had me scratching my head.

The show still has a rather condescending attitude toward Indiana. In fact, the creators have added a song called "The Lamest Place on Earth," which is actually a pretty good song, although the bridge is dull. And speaking of lame, "What It Means to Be a Friend" still has a horribly cliched title, but it makes for a nice moment in the show, mostly due to the talented young actress playing Patrice, one Allie Trimm. Other standouts in the cast include the deliciously evil Elizabeth Gillies as the plotting Lucy, and the endearing Aaron Simon Gross as Evan's wisecracking (and terminal) sidekick.

I saw 13 at a Saturday matinee, so I got to see Corey Snide as the central character Evan. Snide doesn't look the least bit Jewish, and he acts way too much with his hands, but he's a great dancer, which is to be expected since he's played the title character in Billy Elliot in London and Australia. One of the highlights of the show is Christopher Gattelli's dynamic choreography, which nicely captures the countenance and attitude of contemporary teens.

The creators seem to know that Gattelli's choreography will be one of the show's main selling points, so they've added a coda after the curtain call, which wasn't listed in the program, apparently called "Brand
New You." (I'm guessing based on the lyrics.) The song is superfluous but inoffensive, and it does give some of the supporter players a chance to show off their
vocal and tap-dancing skills. But I think it comes dangerously close to the concert that the producers of Grease added to the
end of the show to give "American Idol" winner Taylor Hicks something
else to do in the show besides just "Beauty School Dropout."

September 26, 2008

If you were, like me, deeply disappointed in the 2005 movie version of "Rent," then you'll be very happy to learn that the new filmed version, called "Rent: Filmed Live on Broadway," is infinitely better. It has its quirks and flaws, but on the whole, it's a thrilling document of a landmark show.

The film starts off a bit creaky, with the actors playing a bit too much to the cameras. Or perhaps that was just a sign of my need to get used to what is in fact a new medium: a "live" film of a Broadway musical being shown in a local movie theater. But, to me, it seemed that people were breaking character at first, as if to say, "Isn't it cool we're filming this!", and exhibiting an annoying "Yeah, man!" enthusiasm when they're singing songs about how miserable their lives are. For the most part, the
filming didn't call attention to itself, allowing the
power of the show to speak for itself.

But once the power of the piece kicked in, I was reminded of what a terrific show Rent is: the setting, the emotions, the relationships, the subtext. It's a rich and complexly executed show, performed with admirable restraint by the mostly strong final Broadway cast. I haven't seen the show in a few years, and as I sat watching the film, I was reminded that certain parts of Rent are incredibly well written, including the "I Should Tell You" duet during the "La Vie Boheme" sequence. There's also some stuff that's hackneyed and lame, including "Happy New Year" and the almost unbearable scene after the funeral. ("You have to learn to love yourself," and all that crap. Yeesh.)

But the dynamic final cast somehow made even the lamest of lines work. In fact, some of them were even better than their original-cast counterparts. Particularly good were Will Chase (Roger), Adam Kantor (Mark), Renée Elise Goldsberry (Mimi), and Justin Johnston (Angel). Chase brought more vocal and dramatic modulation to the part than Adam Pascal, and Johnston found much more humor in the role of Angel than I recall from Tony winner Wilson Jermaine Heredia.

I must begrudgingly admit that Eden Espinosa as Maureen was surprisingly effective. I've never been a fan of her particular brand of vocal histrionics, but she kept her excesses in check, and made for a effective foil to Tracie Thoms' likewise serviceable Joanne. Michael McElroy as Collins may have fallen victim to my heightened expectations. The second act reprise of "I'll Cover You" is one of the most moving moments in musical-theater history, but McElroy's rendition didn't really do it for me. Even so, I still found myself blubbering through most of the second act, overwhelmed by the sheer power of the story, the performers, and Jonathan Larson's kick-ass score.

"Rent: Filmed Live on Broadway" plays this Saturday and Sunday, September 27th and 28th, literally at a theater near you. No word yet on whether there are plans to release the film on DVD. But I'm sincerely hoping that they do.

September 25, 2008

According to Playbill.com, a musical version of the notorious Bret Easton Ellis novel America Psycho is aiming for Broadway. The novel concerns a consumer-brand-obsessed New York investment banker who is also a heartless serial killer. Geez, that just screams Broadway musical, doesn't it?

Yeah, yeah, I know. I'm the guy who keeps saying that there's no such thing as a bad idea for a musical, only bad execution. But I have a really hard time thinking of a chainsaw-wielding psychopath singing and dancing (or, perhaps, slashing and mutilating in 4/4 time) at the Winter Garden, or even the Belasco.

On the other hand, given the current crisis in the financial sector, perhaps the time is right for a musical version of what appears to be a satire of Wall Street morality and obsessive materialism. I haven't read the book or seen the 2000 "American Psycho" movie, which starred Christian Bale as Patrick Bateman, mostly because I'm a total puss when it comes to violence, and both book and film seemed pretty graphic. I did see Evil Dead: the Musical, which was gory as hell, but in a very cartoonish way. Something tells me that American Psycho: the Musical will be anything but a cartoon.

No word yet on dates or creative staff, but apparently the Bateman character had a special fondness for the music of Phil Collins. [Insert joke about Collins butchering the score to Tarzan here.] Any conjectures, dear reader, as to composers/lyricists who could do American Psycho justice?

Many were predicting the imminent demise of Legally Blonde, and it turns out they were right. The show has posted a closing notice, and will play its last Broadway performance on October 19th after 595 performances and 30 previews.

Although I wasn't exactly wild about Legally Blonde (read my review here), I did appreciate the fact that it was luring younger theatergoers. But there are certainly other shows on Broadway right now that are attracting younger audiences, and Legally Blonde's departure actually makes room for a couple of upcoming productions.

In fact, the vultures have been circling Legally Blonde, virtually rooting for it to close. The impending West Side Story revival has long been slated for a Nederlander theater, but until now the only one available was the Nederlander Theatre itself, the former longtime home of Rent. But West Side Story director and librettist Arthur Laurents apparently wasn't thrilled with the idea: the Nederlander is kind of seedy, and it's way down on 41st Street. (Practically Siberia, y'know.) Legally Blonde's closure makes available the ultra-desirable and centrally located Palace Theater, a much grander place to showcase Laurents' other masterpiece.

Which means the Nederlander Theatre will likely house the Broadway transfer of the Public Theater's production of Hair. Apparently the folks at the Public have been salivating at the prospect: the funky Nederlander would be the perfect indoor locale for their dynamic and well-received production. (Read my review here.) So, despite the uncertain economic times, there's still no shortage of productions looking for a Broadway berth.

September 24, 2008

In a surprising move, the producers of the Broadway musical Xanadu have announced that the show will shutter two weeks earlier than expected. Last week, the show posted its closing notice, and was scheduled to end its run on October 12th. But now Xanadu will close this Sunday, September 28th.

The producers have explained that they want to stem any undue losses based on the uncertain economic climate. Since the end of Whoopi Goldberg's recent stint in the show, its weekly grosses have dropped about 40%, down to the show's pre-Tony levels, but certainly not below. The show has actually had a few weeks in its history during which it has grossed a bit less that it has over the past two weeks. So, yeah, it's not as though the show is raking in the cash, but depending on the show's weekly "nut," it could still be making money.

Things have admittedly been pretty soft on Broadway in general over the past few weeks, although there are still at least 5 shows that are pulling in around $1 million a week (Wicked, Jersey Boys, The Lion King, South Pacific and Mamma Mia). So the economic situation isn't that bad, at least not yet. And I can't imagine that all those now-out-of-work investment bankers and Wall Street hot shots were spending their expense-account dollars on Xanadu, at least not the straight ones.

Well, whatever the real cause of the Xanadu's premature closure, I for one am seriously bummed, and I'm really glad I got a chance to see it an unprecedented (for me) three times. Xanadu librettist Douglas Carter Beane has recently been working on at least two new musical efforts, Dancing in the Dark and The Big Time. The former appears to be stalled after a bumpy tryout in San Diego, but the latter is still a going concern, currently aiming for a Broadway bow in 2010. I greatly look forward to watching how this intelligent, funny, and talented man helps to shape the future of the musical stage.

What's That Smell, which recently extended its run through October 5th, is a self-described satire charting "the career of eternally up-and-coming (and fictitious) musical-theater composer Jacob Sterling." The show is the brainchild of David Pittu, an intense and disciplined performer who was one of the best things about Lovemusik, despite Hal Prince's AWOL direction and Patricia Birch's awkward choreography.

As for What's That Smell, which is co-directed by Pittu and Neil Pepe, artistic director of the Atlantic Theater Company, here we have yet another show focused on celebrating musical-theater minutia and making gentle fun of the form. It's not quite as insider-y as[title of show], nor as consistently funny as The Drowsy Chaperone, nor as sharply satirical as Urinetown. But WTS nonetheless makes for an engaging evening, the main attractions of which are two razor-sharp characterizations by actors at the top of their form. The Atlantic's intimate Stage 2 on 16th Street is the perfect place to experience these talented actors.

Pittu is a wonder to watch, bringing an almost demonic intensity to his portrayal of the self-absorbed and utterly clueless Sterling. Matching Pittu in crafting a remarkably comprehensive characterization is Peter Bartlett as the host of a musical-theater chat show that provides a framing device for showcasing Sterling's hapless body of work. The veteran Bartlett only recently came to my attention as a replacement cast member in The Drowsy Chaperone, in which he was disappointingly indistinct as Underling. Bartlett also appeared in the short-lived reworking of The Frogs, which I didn't get to see, but Bartlett is a remarkable presence on the cast recording as Pluto.

As for What's That Smell as a show, well, it's admittedly hard to sustain
deliberately bad writing, so it's probably a good thing that the show
is only 75 minutes long. WTS draws a few too many of its considerable laughs from the same wells. Running gags include unlikely sources for musical ideas ("Private Benjamin," "La Femme Nikita," etc.) and a succession of risible acronyms (e.g. CLOT = Composers and Lyricists of Tomorrow).

The show also tosses barbs at stunt casting, the commercialization of
Broadway theater, and consumerism in general. In the show, the Jacob Sterling character is working on a show called Shopping Out Loud, in which individual store chains underwrite their sections of the
show, providing audience members with a store discount when they present their ticket stubs. Pittu also throws in an attempt at making fun of people who use 9/11 to inject ready-made pathos into their art. The overall effect is fun but unremarkable, an amusing trifle that showcases two terrific performers.

September 20, 2008

I've never blogged from my iPhone before, but I'm in NYC and just heard that [title of show] has posted its closing notice. The show will play its last performance October 12th, the same day that Xanadu plays its final show. (Some would call that ironic. They'd be wrong.)

I didn't bring my laptop this trip, so I figured I'd give the old iPhone a try. I waded my way through the Great Unwashed to the Lyceum to get a photo of the [tos] marquee, but it wasn't coming out. So I decided to buy a [tos] baseball cap (see photo) and take a shot of it instead.

I'm so sad that this charming little show didn't cross over to start attracting more mainstream audience members. But I have a feeling that it's going to live on in regional productions. If ever there was a "Hey, kids. Let's put on a show!" show, this one's it.
I also greatly look forward to whatever Hunter Bell and Jeff Bowen come up with next.

As part of its current mainstage season, the venerable York Theatre Company is presenting the musical Enter Laughing. The York typically reserves its mainstage slots for new works, and although the show's title may be new, the show itself is not.

Enter Laughing is actually a reworked version of So Long, 174th Street, a 1976 flop starring Robert Morse and George S. Irving (and a young Rita Rudner in the chorus), based on comedian Carl Reiner's early life and career. The York presented Enter Laughing last year as part of its Musicals in Mufti series ("mufti" being an Arabic word for "dressed in street clothes"), and the response was apparently so enthusiastic that the folks at the York decided to give the show a fully produced mainstage run.

I wish I could say that the York had rediscovered an under-appreciated gem, but alas I can not. Enter Laughing seems destined to remain a curious musical-theater footnote. In the program notes, the York would have you think that the reason the show didn't succeed was that Robert Morse was too old at the time for such a juvenile role, so the creators set the whole show as a flashback, with the forty-ish Morse playing himself at both ages. Well, the present production of the show removes that admittedly awkward conceit, but what remains isn't exactly great musical theater.

The show's plot involves a stage-struck and female-obsessed young man during the 1930s (the fictionalized Carl Reiner). The show is not without its charms, and features some moderately amusing set pieces, including the hysterical recreation of Reiner's first experience on stage. But the style of the show was thirty years out of date back in the '70s. I'm not saying that the idea is old-hat, although it's not very inspired. The show is old-fashioned not so much in conception as in execution. Joseph Stein's amusing-but-creaky book often does little to integrate Stan Daniels' somewhat tuneful score. The show is very stop-and-sing, with songs that seem to come out of nowhere, a practice that was outdated in the 1940s.

The show's main attraction is its stellar cast. What an unmitigated treat it is to see on stage a spry George S. Irving (who made his Broadway debut in the original frickin' cast of frickin' Oklahoma), recreating his role from the 1976 production. His sharp rendition of the salacious "Butler's Song" is reason enough to see the show. It was also great fun to see husband-and-wife team Michael Tucker and Jill Eikenberry share the stage. I've been a fan of these two talented actors since "L.A. Law,"
and although Tucker doesn't have much to do in the present show,
Eikenberry puts a terrific spin on the stock Jewish mother character.

Janine LaManna gives a delightful turn as the man-hungry Angela, delivering "The Man I Can Love" with more hysterical, borderline psychosis that the song really deserves. It's nice to see LaManna back in form after her disappointing stint as Janet van de Graaf in The Drowsy Chaperone. But the real find here is Josh Grisetti in the lead role. Grisetti is a young actor with a very natural presence, a clarion-clear singing voice, and a natural gift for comedy. If there's any justice in show business, this kid is going places. Let's hope that he finds a vehicle soon that is more worthy of his multifarious talents.

UPDATE: The York Theatre has announced a two-week extension for Enter Laughing. The show is now scheduled to play through October 12th. It's worth a look, particularly for the terrific cast.

September 17, 2008

Forget Lehman Brothers. The Times Square institution that I'm going to miss most is the Broadway production of Xanadu, which will close October 12th after playing 528 performances and 49 previews. I recently saw Xanadu for the third time, and enjoyed it every bit as much as I did the first two times. (Read my three glowing reviews here, here, and here.)

No word yet on whether the show made back its initial investment. Perhaps the recent box-office jolt from Whoopi Goldberg's stint in the show helped put it over the break-even point. Given the size of the cast and the production, and the fact the show will have played more than a year, it's certainly possible that it could close in the black.

Did the Second Stage Theater's recent purchase of the Helen Hayes Theater, at which Xanadu is playing, contribute to the show's closure? It's possible. The folks at 2ST could very well be champing at the bit to start using their new Broadway home.

When I spoke with Xanadu librettist Douglas Carter Beane last year, he said that the folks at the Helen Hayes would loved to have seen Xanadu play there for years, although that may have changed with the sale. I can't imagine that there's any bad blood here: Beane's The Little Dog Laughed played at the 2ST before transferring to Broadway, and his new play Mrs. and Mrs. Fitch is scheduled for a 2ST run later this season.

As for a future life for Xanadu, the show is scheduled to receive a new production at San Diego's La Jolla Playhouse in
November (no doubt because Xanadu director Christopher Ashley is also La Jolla's artistic director), followed by a six-month engagement in Chicago,
and a national tour. Plans are also underway for a London
production. Plus, I get the feeling that the show is likely to have a healthy afterlife in community and scholastic theater. It's just the sort of small, smart, funny show that, like Little Shop of Horrors and Urinetown, has a good chance of becoming a regional favorite.

September 16, 2008

I've been watching the weekly grosses for [title of show] since it opened in July, and frankly I've been cringing. The show started off playing to half-full houses, but the past two weeks it played to about 30% capacity. Youch.

Now, with the show's relatively modest running costs, it's possible that it's eking out a profit, even when it's only pulling in about $100,000 a week. And the past two weeks have been relatively slow on Broadway in general. Even Jersey Boys and Wicked had a few unsold seats.

But things probably need to pick up soon if the show has any chance of playing through Tony time. So far the show has racked up more than 70 performances, which should make composer/lyricist/star Jeff Bowen happy. (He collects Playbills of shows that ran fewer than 50 performances.)

As I said in my review, I had such a great time at the show that I went back to see it again the next day. But I couldn't help thinking that all the inside theatrical references in the show might alienate mainstream theatergoers. I also said that I would love to live in a world in which [title of show] would enjoy a long, healthy, profitable run. I still hope I live in that world, but I'm beginning to have my doubts.

September 15, 2008

As regular readers -- and, indeed, my past students -- will recall, every semester I start my first Boston Conservatory class by asking my students to write down the three best musicals of all time. We then tally the votes on the board, and use the list to spark a discussion of what characteristics, if any, these shows might share. This helps establish one of the themes of my course: what defines a quality musical? At the end of the course, we repeat the exercise, to see how things may have changed.

Well, I had my first class last week, and here's this semester's list of the best musicals ever, along with the number of votes that particular show received:

There's much more variability in the list than in recent years. This is probably because, this year, rather than have students announce their choices, I asked them to write them down and pass in the papers. In previous years, students changed their choices based on what other people said, so I think this year's list is a more accurate reflection of what the students instinctively like.

So, is Les Misérables really the best musical ever? Well, it's certainly the best of the big British blockbusters, although that's not really saying much. I rank Les Miz #53 on my list of the 100 Best Musicals of All Time. It's an enjoyable show, if a trifle long, and it's unquestionably very popular. Also, it's interesting to note that three of the shows that the students list in their top 15 aren't even in my top 100: Spring Awakening, Parade, and Hair, although I list all three on my list of the 100 Next-Best Musicals. I am considering moving Hair up to my top 100 based on seeing the recent Public Theater production in Central Park.

Every year, it seems, Jekyll & Hyde rears its ugly, derivative head. In the past, I've let it slide, hoping that by the end of the course students will come to recognize why it's an unmitigated pile of donkey dung. But last year, I added a unit at the end of the course in which I address why bad shows are bad, specifically focusing on Jekyll & Hyde, Victor/Victoria, and Carrie. In the end, of course, it's not really about what I think, but I do want students to start thinking more critically about exactly why they enjoy certain shows, and why others suck monkey wang.

But this year, the student who voted for Jekyll & Hyde was not only unapologetic, he also openly ridiculed me for loving Grey Gardens. Let me repeat that: someone who thinks that Jekyll & Hyde is one of the best musicals ever derided my affection for Grey Gardens. Out loud. In front of the rest of the class. Without irony.

September 14, 2008

OK, so you weren't able to get down to New York to see the final performance of Rent. That doesn't mean you need to be left out in the cold.

As you may know, Sony Pictures filmed a number of recent performances of the show, and compiled them together for theatrical release. The film will play movie theaters nationwide on September 24th, 25th, 27th, and 28th under the auspices of Sony's The Hot Ticket.

Tickets are $20, which isn't bad, considering a regular movie these days is $10, and Broadway shows average about $75 with discounts, about $100 without. Plus, you get to see the terrific Will Chase play Roger and the loud Eden Espinosa play Maureen. Of course, the show is slated to launch another national tour in 2009 with original stars Adam Pascal and Anthony Rapp at the helm, so you could just wait to see it live. But something tells me there's going to be something special about the energy of the final Broadway cast. And we could certainly use something to erase the painful memory of Chris Columbus's flaccid 2005 movie.

Flawed though it may be, Rent is a landmark show, and one that had a tremendous impact on me, as well as many other people. I, for one, am thrilled at the prospect of being able to see the show again "live," and I hope this sort of thing catches on, so more people can get to see Broadway productions in far-flung areas and at affordable prices.

I've been reading the reviews for Fela, and many of them are consonant with my take on the show: the songs are great, the dance is amazing, and the cast is energetic. But the monologue format of the book, combined with the drama-sapping technique of using supertitles, robs the show of much of the potential power in the story of Fela Anikulapo Kuti.

If the show does make the move to Broadway, I'll be interested to see what changes, if any, director/choreographer/librettist Bill T. Jones and co-librettist Jim Lewis make to the show. A number of recent Off-Broadway-to-Broadway transfers have seen major changes en route, including Grey Gardens, In the Heights, and Spring Awakening, for which Jones provided the Tony-winning choreography. But, short of a complete rewrite, I can't see much that they could do that would change my view of the show.

Before I talk about the Boston stop of national tour of A Chorus Line, I need to address a major factor that definitely influenced my mood and may have affected my attitude toward the production. The night that I saw the show, there were hundreds of inner-city children in attendance as part of the Marilyn Rodman Theatre for Kids program, sponsored by Suffolk Construction. First, I want to say that I applaud every effort to engage children in the theatrical arts. I commend both organizations for their worthy efforts, and strongly encourage them to continue.

It would be great if, as part of providing an entree into the theater for these kids,
that the organizations also educated them on proper theater behavior.
The kids talked non-stop throughout the show, and there was a constant rustling of
plastic bags as they enjoyed their snacks of choice. A Chorus Line has no intermission, and the kids were frequently getting up to go to the bathroom.

Also, I have to wonder if anyone involved had actually seen A Chorus Line before. There's a lot of saucy language, and the kids giggled every time someone said a dirty word, even if it wasn't meant to be funny. This was particularly distracting during Paul's monologue, which prompted hoots and cries of "Gross!" as Paul described his experiences with lecherous older men and forays into drag performance.

Again, I heartily applaud efforts to introduce children to the theater, but I would respectfully suggest that the parties involved choose the shows more carefully. The national tours of Legally Blonde and Spring Awakening are also part of the Broadway Across America series. Legally Blonde would be great for these kids, but I would strongly advise against Spring Awakening. I'm not trying to be a prude here: I vociferously oppose censorship. But the themes and language of this show would likely prompt inappropriate responses from the kids in attendance, and ruin that admirable and very serious show for others.

Anyway, about the show itself. When I saw the recently closed Broadway revival, I found it professional but bloodless. (Read my review.) Director Bob Avian captured all the details of Michael Bennett's original production, but none of the heart. Well, the current touring production makes the admittedly lackluster revival look good by comparison.

The strongest aspect of this production is the choreography, recreated lovingly by original cast member Baayork Lee. But while the dancing is crisp, the individual performances are forced and unfocused. There's no question that the people onstage are talented, but there's no clear directorial hand here to modulate and sharpen the performances.

Probably the most disappointing is Gabrielle Ruiz as Diana Morales, who crosses over the line from spunky to abrasive. Her attitude towards Zach, the director character, is far too confrontational and disrespectful. She'd never get away with being that in-your-face with this guy. Likewise unsatisfying was Kevin Santos as Paul, who seems to have passed Melodrama 101 with flying colors. Crying onstage is admittedly difficult, but Santos doesn't seem to know how to do it convincingly. Natalie Elise Hall was similarly over-the-top as Val, but she brought an impish sort of porn star charm, and some original touches, to "Dance Ten Looks Three."

A Chorus Line is unquestionably a landmark show, and the current touring production is probably fine for people who have never seen it. But I guess I'm going to have to give up on expecting any production to even come close to the power and impact of my initial experience with the show. I was thirteen when I saw the first touring production in Boston. I was riveted by the powerful score, the electrifying dance, and the deeply personal stories that the show portrayed. I also saw my first gay role models. Granted, they were a bit stereotypical and pathetic, but they were gay, and I knew then that I was, too. As I sat crying silently in the dark of the Shubert Theater, I felt a sense of welcome, a sense that this was where I belonged. As I watched the show last night at the Opera House, I thought perhaps there might be some other thirteen-year-old boy in the audience who was having a similar experience to mine.

September 11, 2008

The electrifying Public Theater production of Hair, which received three extensions at the Delacorte in Central Park, will apparently transfer to Broadway in 2009. No casting has been announced, but I would assume that they'll try to keep as much of the current cast as possible, including the dynamic Will Swenson as Berger. Tony nominee Jonathan Groff may also return as Claude, after completing filming for the new Ang Lee film, "Taking Woodstock." Also no word yet on the preview and opening dates, nor on which theater the show will play.

As I said in my review, this production of Hair forced me to rethink the place of the show in the musical theater canon. The show doesn't read well on paper, but somehow the magic of theater, combined with director Diane Paulus's vivacious production, transform the fragmented bones of the piece into a fully fleshed wonder. Not just a product of its time and place, Hair has a message that speaks to our time, indeed to any time. (Paulus was recently picked as the new artistic director of the American
Repertory Theater in Cambridge. I may actually have to start seeing
shows at the ART. I've always found the their choice of shows rather dull, although I have been impressed when I actually attended something there.)

Hair plays in Central Park until September 14th. Beg, borrow, or steal a ticket, if you can. I HATE to be one of those people ("Oh, it was soooooo much better in London...," "You mean you didn't get a chance to see the private workshop? Oh, you poor dear..."), but I can't imagine that Hair could be any better than it was at the Delacorte. Central Park makes a perfect setting for the show, lending itself nicely to numerous sharp directorial touches. I'm sure the show will play well in a proscenium theater, but something inevitably will be lost in the process. Of course, I hope to see it again on Broadway, if only to see how they've made the transfer successful.

September 10, 2008

Yes, folks, Rent has closed, after a long and healthy run. But the great thing about Broadway these days is that there are always plenty of shows to fill the void. Here's a sampling of some of the musicals on the horizon.

PARADISE FOUND: Inspired by the Joseph Roth
novel The Tale of the 1002nd Night. Set in 1870's Vienna, it tells the story of the shah of Persia's infatuation with an Austrian countess.Staff: Direction by Harold Prince. Music by Johann Strauss II and Jonathan Tunick. Lyrics by Ellen Fitzhugh (Grind), and a libretto by Richard Nelson (Chess, James Joyce's The Dead). Cast: Mandy Patinkin, John Cullum, Judy Kaye and Shuler HensleyStatus: The Broadway production will begin rehearsals next year. No word yet on whether there will be a tryout production, but the
Center Theatre Group in Los Angeles, which runs the Ahmanson
Theatre and the Mark Taper Forum, produced a
reading in April 2008. My Take: Not to be confused with Angels, the upcoming musical based on Milton's Paradise Lost (and, according to at least one cast member, embarrassingly bad.) The cast and crew of Paradise Found are a veritable Who's Who of Broadway royalty, but that's no guarantee of anything, as we saw in the extremely disappointing Lovemusik, Prince's last Broadway outing, which also lacked an original score. Prince recently told Michael Riedel of the New York Post that, despite the recent economic boom on Broadway, there's been a lack of real creativity. That's arguably true. But if Lovemusik is all that Prince has to offer in response, then his admonishments fall on deaf ears. Put up or shut up, Hal.

FIRST WIVES CLUB: Based on the 1996 movie of the same name. Staff: Boasts a score by Motown writers Lamont Dozier, Brian Holland and Eddie Holland. ("How Sweet It Is," "Baby I Need Your Loving,"
"Stop! In the Name of Love," "You Can't Hurry Love" and "I Can't Help
Myself.") The librettist is Tony-Award winner Rupert Holmes (The Mystery of Edwin Drood, Curtains). The director will be Francesca Zambello (see Rebecca above, also the Guthrie's Little House on the Prairie). Cast: Nothing announced yet, but Liz Smith recently reported that the producers are planning to approach Bernadette Peters, Stockard Channing, and Megan Mullally. Status: The show is scheduled to play the Old Globe in San Diego in the summer of 2009, prior to Broadway.My Take: The popular-movie-gone-Broadway genre is officially tired, and I've always found the movie a bit nasty and mean-spirited. Also, the show is a bit too close in tone to 9 to 5, which will precede The First Wives Club on Broadway by at least a year. So, let's just say that it's not first on my list of shows to see. But I have a few friends in San Diego whom I keep meaning to visit. Maybe I'll pop out for one of the tryout performances. (You hear that, Stevie?)

September 06, 2008

As a number of media outlets reported earlier this week, Rob Ashford, the Tony-winning choreographer and incipient director, has been called in to Seattle to provide a "fresh pair of eyes" to the very-much-above-the-radar new musical Shrek. Ashford was supposed to be at the helm of the now-postponed Brigadoon revival this fall, but...well...now he isn't. [Sniff]

BroadwayWorld.com referred to Ashford as "joining the creative team" of Shrek, without specifying what his role would be. Well, the show already has a director (Avenue Q's Jason Moore) and a choreographer (Josh Prince), so Ashford must have been called in as a "show doctor."

Does this mean the show is in trouble? Not necessarily. It could just be that first-time producers Dreamworks Theatricals are hedging their bets to make sure that the show isn't an expensive, high-profile embarrassment. Many terrific musicals have had trouble out of town, and have benefited greatly from outside help. Of course, others have failed despite numerous infusions of external creative input.

Shrek began previews in Seattle on August 14th and is scheduled to open there September 10th. Anyone out there seen it yet? Are we looking at another Hairspray or another Young Frankenstein? (Both shows had Seattle tryout runs.) Or will Shrek wind up being something artistically and financially in between?

September 04, 2008

I have this bad habit of buying theater books and then letting them pile up. I have a bookcase full of unread biographies of Bob Fosse, Jerome Robbins, and Stephen Sondheim, as well as various surveys of the musical-theater landscape. There are certainly many books on my shelves that I have read, often as research for my course at Boston Conservatory. But, it's funny, ever since I started teaching at BoCo, reading about theater has taken on a somewhat obligatory feel, becoming more like homework than pleasure reading.

So, on my recent trip to New York, when I made my regular stop at the Drama Book Shop on 40th Street, I hesitated before buying Gypsy: A Memoir, the book upon which the Broadway musical Gypsy is based, lest I add yet another tome to my pile of shame. But, even before I had left the store, I found myself drawn into the book, and I wound up tearing through more than half of it on the bus ride home.

Not surprisingly, the book is considerably different from the musical. Of necessity, the events of the show are considerably compressed, but there are also substantive discrepancies between memoir and musical. For example, the Herbie character, so prominent in the show, appears to be a composite of a number of different men from the book, and disappears well before the pivotal confrontation scene between Rose and Herbie in the show. Likewise, the Tulsa character is an amalgam of several boys from the act.

I could go on, but suffice to say that librettist Arthur Laurents
employed a generous dose of dramatic license in crafting the musical from the book's raw material. And, on the whole, he's improved it tremendously, providing focus to the drama, and creating a
more compelling series of events. In a way, it reminds me of the play version of Auntie Mame. The original Patrick Dennis book is episodic at best, and
lacks a coherent through line. Playwrights Jerome Lawrence and Robert E. Lee did a bang-up job of making
the story more cohesive and more humorous. (Betty Comden and Adolph Green, who wrote the screenplay for the 1958 movie version, didn't really change much of the play, although they did add
some priceless one-liners.)

Every year, when my BoCo students write their papers on the most overrated musical, someone inevitably writes about how a particular show isn't "true to its source." I usually respond by writing on the student's paper, "Name one that is." Many of the best musicals of all time play fast and loose with their source material, including My Fair Lady, West Side Story, Oklahoma!, Guys and Dolls, Fiddler on the Roof, and The King and I. All were vastly different from the works upon which they were based, some to the point of completely changing the ending, even the intent, of the original piece.

What's more, who's to say that Gypsy Rose Lee's memoirs bear the stamp of truth to begin with? Author Steven Suskin, in his liner notes to the new Patti LuPone recording of Gypsy, intimates that
Lee may have employed a bit of dramatic license herself. "Gypsy is a self-described 'musical fable'," Suskin writes, "in the sense that the
musical...is just about as authentic, factually speaking, as Ms. Lee's
fanciful memoirs..."

I'm not sure where Suskin himself is getting his facts (perhaps he did some actual [gasp] research), but aren't all memoirs to a certain extent fanciful? I mean, Lee wrote the book decades after the events she describes. Even if she kept a diary, there inevitably would have been some holes to fill in. Whenever I read a memoir, like an Augusten Burroughs book or Harpo Speaks (the single best autobiography I've ever read), I always wonder how people can recall actual dialog from years before. Apparently, Lee's sister, the Broadway actress June Havoc, had similar suspicions, and took great exception to how she was portrayed in Gypsy's book, eventually publishing a retaliatory memoir of her own, Early Havoc.

So, facts aside, both the musical and the book provide fascinating portraits of some really compelling characters. The book affords more insight into the Gypsy character, laying bare
her frustration and the keen lack of respect she felt as a burlesque
star who dreamed of going legit. The creators of the musical decided to focus on the mother, partly because of their star, Ethel Merman, but also because Mama Rose is simply a fascinating train-wreck of a human being.

The book also offers intriguing glimpses of some of the famous folk that Gypsy Rose Lee met along the way, including the wonderful Fanny Brice, whose life became the subject of the next musical that composer Jule Styne would work on after Gypsy. (i.e. Funny Girl) I just ordered a couple of books about Brice from Amazon, and am eagerly looking forward to reading them. Perhaps I've finally broken my pattern.

September 03, 2008

Attention producers: the very desirable Al Hirshfeld Theater will likely be available sometime very soon. Barring any unforeseen miracle, current tenant A Tale of Two Cities is likely not long for this world. In a recent New York Post column, Michael Riedel refers to the show as being "bad-mouthed into an early grave." Keep in mind that this is the same man who referred to Cry-Baby as a possible "sleeper hit," and to the soon-to-open Fela as his pick for "this season's terrain-changer." (See my Fela review below. My take: Not so much.)

But, at least in the case of A Tale of Two Cities, I'm going to go out on a limb and say that Riedel is probably right. Of course, I could be wrong. (It's happened before.) But I can't imagine that, once the reviews are out, anyone will be lining up to see this derivative drivel. And it's not like they're lining up now, either: the show has played to a little over two-thirds capacity for its two weeks of previews so far, and its average ticket price is has been less than $60. So, yeah, people are lining up, but at TKTS.

Some might say that the problem is that the creators have jumped onto the Les Misérables bandwagon about two decades too late. But there's another problem: the show sucks. Not as much as, say, Lestat or The Pirate Queen, perhaps, but enough to make Jekyll and Hyde look good by comparison. At first, as I sat watching A Tale of Two Cities, I couldn't help thinking of it as Les Miz light. But by the end of the show, the "light" moniker no longer seemed appropriate: although the show clocked in at an hour shorter than Les Miz, it felt about an hour longer.

Most of the blame must, of course, fall at the feet of triple-threat author Jill Santoriello, who supplied the book, music, and lyrics. It's admirable that Santoriello aimed so high, but in retrospect she might have benefited from some more seasoned assistance. Her banal dialog, a gross disservice to Dickens, is peppered liberally with hoary and anachronistic one-liners like something out of "Happy Days," and, no, I'm not talking Beckett here. Warren Carlyle's broad direction and staging certainly don't do Santoriello's words any favors.

As for Santoriello's music, well, it mostly comprises virtually tuneless recitative, undistinguished ballads, and bland drinking songs. I will admit that there were a few tunes that stuck in my head, but mostly because I had heard them before. Santoriello appears to have subconsciously lifted a melody or two from Andrew Lloyd Webber. (How's that for irony?) One motif comes directly from "Growltiger's Last Stand" in Cats. ("Growltiger had no eye or ear for aught but Griddlebone...")

I will concede that A Tale of Two Cities has a compelling story to tell, but only because we're dealing with Dickens, for heaven's sake. Even so, the big-picture plot points in the musical are cloudy: the motivation for the entire French Revolution would appear to have been the death of one child. And it's not entirely clear why the mob decides to storm the Bastille. As for the storyline itself, Satoriello employs clumsy, plodding expository techniques to relay key developments. "Did you hear, Carton? The Jujamcyns are already looking for another tenant for the Hirshfeld," and the like.

As is true of most musical disasters, there are some talented performers in the mix, including Greg Edelman, (whose wife Carolee Carmello was one of the only things worth watching in Lestat), Aaron Lazar, and James Barbour, but the most professional thing on stage is Tony Walton's economical yet visually impressive set, a modular wonder that sets an ominous tone. Unfortunately, the portent that looms over A Tale of Two Cities is its all-too-likely imminent demise. It makes me wonder how many of the reviews will feature some variant on "The worst of times" in their headlines.

September 02, 2008

You know it's been a bad theater weekend when the best show you saw is one that you've already seen. Twice. I started my recent NYC jaunt with the new Off Broadway musical Fela, and was not impressed. (See my review below.) Next I took in the new Broadway tuner A Tale of Two Cities and was pert near horrified. (Look for my review later in the week.)

Fortunately, as a palate cleanser, I had secured a ticket to the sold-out Saturday night performance of Xanadu, a show of which I continue to be an ardent fan, mostly for Douglas Carter Beane's riotous book and for the show's incandescent cast of Broadway's best. In fact, Xanadu is the first Broadway production I've ever seen three times.

As much as I love the show, I was concerned when Whoopi Goldberg joined the cast. I'm all for stunt casting, if it keeps a good show running, and if it works within the context of the show. But I was worried that Whoopi would upstage or detract from the rest of the cast.
Plus I wasn't sure that the people who came just to see Whoopi would be satisfied: Calliope is only a supporting role.

Well, I'm happy to report that Whoopi's stint appears to have been, at the very least, a financial success for Xanadu. Since the Tony Awards in June, the show's grosses had been rising steadily, but they topped the $300,000 mark for the first time after Whoopi joined the cast in July. It's not clear whether that momentum will continue when she leaves on September 7th, or whether things will settle back to their pre-Tony levels. Perhaps the folks who came to see Whoopi but were impressed by the show itself will generate positive word of mouth. We'll see.

As for Whoopi's performance, well, it could have been a lot worse. (Brought to you by the Department of Damning With Faint Praise.) She's actually a strong, if unrefined, singer, but she didn't quite fit in with the arch style of he rest of the cast. She did bring a certain undeniable Whoopi-ness to her line readings: Beane even changed a few of Calliope's lines to accommodate her presence, and most of them were quite funny. Although Whoopi clearly knew all the choreography, she executed it with a definite sense of marking, as if to say "You don't really expect me to dance like the rest of these people, do you?"

On a side note, Beane has also changed one of the lines in the show that made reference to Les Misérables, which was playing at the Broadhurst across the street last year when Xanadu opened. Now it's a joke about Gypsy. The Melpomene character makes reference to the fact that, at this point in the show, Patti LuPone hasn't even alienated her first daughter. I wonder if, when Equus opens at the Broadhurst, whether Beane will change the line to something like "Harry Potter hasn't even taken his clothes off yet..."